1 Thursday, 13 May 2010
2 [Open session]
3 [The accused entered court]
4 [The witness takes the stand]
5 --- Upon commencing at 2.20 p.m.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Good afternoon to everybody.
7 Madam Registrar, would you please call the case.
8 THE REGISTRAR: Good afternoon, Your Honours.
9 Good afternoon everyone in and around the courtroom.
10 This is the case IT-03-69-T, the Prosecutor versus Jovica Stanisic
11 and Franko Simatovic.
12 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
13 Before we continue -- and Witness JF-038 this is not in relation
14 to your testimony, but I would like to inform the parties that the
15 Prosecution's motion for leave to amend the 65 ter summary for
16 Witness JF-033, which was filed on the 7th of May, is granted. I add to
17 this that the Defence objections are denied because the real issue, and
18 that became clear and doesn't come as a surprise, the real issue was not
19 whether the language of the 65 ter summary would change but what
20 consequences that would have for the proceedings, and the Chamber will
21 give the reasons for this decision in writing and that will follow soon.
22 Then, Mr. Jordash, are you ready to continue your
24 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, yes.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then Witness JF-038, I would like to remind
1 you that you are still bound by the solemn declaration you've given
2 yesterday at the beginning of your testimony, that is, that you'll speak
3 the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
4 Please proceed, Mr. Jordash.
5 MR. JORDASH: Thank you, Your Honour.
6 WITNESS: JF-038 [Resumed]
7 [Witness answered through interpreter]
8 Cross-examination by Mr. Jordash: [Continued]
9 Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Witness.
10 A. Good afternoon.
11 MR. JORDASH: Please could I have 65 ter 1D244 on the e-court,
13 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: The background noise is
14 very strong and it makes it quite difficult to interpret what Mr. Jordash
15 is saying.
16 JUDGE ORIE: I hear no background noise myself, so I don't know
17 what causes it. Is there background noise when I speak as well?
18 THE INTERPRETER: Not, Your Honour. So far it's while
19 Mr. Jordash is speaking.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Mr. Jordash, there's something in your
21 background which causes problems.
22 MR. JORDASH: It's probably Mr. Bakrac.
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I cannot make out what I see on the
24 screen. Can you blow it up a bit, please?
25 MR. JORDASH: I'm going to continue, Your Honour, but our screen
1 isn't working, but I've got a paper copy so as long as everything else
2 is, I can continue for a moment.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, I'm in a similar position, that it says
4 "no computer evidence," but now it appears on my screen.
5 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, so it does here.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Now, as far as the background noise is concerned, if
7 I plug in on my voice distorted socket, I have background as well. If,
8 however, I plug in at the usual socket, I have hardly or no background
10 MR. JORDASH:
11 Q. Do you see this document, Mr. Witness? And you see the first
12 paragraph which --
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. -- refers to a session of the SFRY Presidency of the
15 20th February, 1992
16 of the task force within the federal Secretariat of the Interior composed
17 of representatives of the relevant organs of the Serbian Krajinas and
18 experts of the federal Secretariat of the Interior. Its task being to
19 study and prepare a draft bill regulating the Internal Affairs Service in
20 the Republic of Serbian Krajina and to propose the basic organisational
21 structure of the service. Were you aware of these conclusions at or
22 thereabouts when they were reached?
23 A. No, I'm not.
24 Q. Are you in any way familiar with this document?
25 MR. JORDASH: Please could we scroll the B/C/S and the English so
1 we can see the first page so the witness can read what's contained
3 Q. So, witness, can I ask you - if you don't know anything about
4 this document, then you don't know. Do you know about the involvement of
5 the federal Secretariat of the Interior with the setting up of the MUP of
6 the Serbian Krajina?
7 A. Well, it's been quite a while since then, so I really can't
8 recall. I could not really explain the details, but I'm not aware of
9 these matters. Perhaps there were -- there was co-operation in the
10 organising of the public security service, but as for the state security
11 service, I'm not familiar that there was any such thing.
12 Q. So you are familiar with the co-operation, in fact more than
13 co-operation, I suggest, deep involvement of the federal SUP in the
14 setting up of the Serbian Krajina's Ministry of Interior as per this
15 document and as per the conclusions it refers to?
16 A. Perhaps I should give a broader explanation here. I don't know
17 how familiar you are with all this, but I've to reiterate, as for the
18 work of the state security service, I think it wasn't frequent. As for
19 public security service, I'm not really competent to speak about that.
20 And I would like to add something. I clearly remember that when
21 we prepared a letter or communication to be sent to other republics, we
22 would always indicate that the recipients are six republics and two
23 anonymous provinces, at least when I worked in the service that was the
24 format I used. And I have to repeat again this relates to the work of
25 the state security service. As for the public security service, I
1 wouldn't know about that.
2 JUDGE ORIE: Just for me to understand your question, you talked
3 in your last question about a deep involvement. I have not had an
4 opportunities to read the whole of the document, but it looks at if the
5 task is to study and prepare a draft bill regulating the Internal Affairs
6 and to propose the basic organisational structure of the service, where
7 earlier you said deep involvement of the federal SUP in the setting up of
8 the service. Is there any disagreement that this is defining structural
9 elements and legislation which is, well, it's one element of setting up
10 an organisation?
11 MR. JORDASH: Yes, that was my point, the deep involvement of the
12 federal SUP and the setting up of the Ministry of the Interior of the
13 Republic of Serbian
14 JUDGE ORIE: Yes -- no, I'm asking this because this looks to be
15 very much administrative support, what legislation do we need, what
16 should be the organisational structure; which is, of course, something
17 different than how do we recruit the people, how do we -- you mean
18 setting up is a rather ambiguous term.
19 MR. JORDASH: Well, I was hoping that the witness would clarify
20 what his understanding was. I was putting a general proposition and
21 hoping the witness could be more specific about it, but since the --
22 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if that was what you had on mind, then I leave
23 it to that. Perhaps I would focus the question a bit more on that: What
24 do you understand by this and this and this. But please proceed.
25 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
1 Q. If your position, Mr. Witness, is that you do not know much about
2 this co-operation, then I'll move on from this document. Is that your
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. JORDASH: May I tender this exhibit, please.
6 MR. HOFFMANN: I do object. There's no foundation laid by this
7 witness. He's not familiar with this document. He's not familiar with
8 the content of the document.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Would you object against a bar table submission?
10 MR. HOFFMANN: If we clarify the issue of where this document is
11 coming from, then we can do that.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The document is not dated, but from its content it
13 seems that it must be in between the meeting referred to and what has
14 been done at the next session in, where was it, in -- I think it was
15 in --
16 MR. JORDASH: 26th of February.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, in Vukovar. Origin, Mr. --
18 MR. JORDASH: We obtained it from the EDS system. And Your
19 Honour can see from the top -- well, Your Honour can't see on the screen,
20 but on the top right-hand corner of the English version is the ERN number
21 or the signifying number L004-6625.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, did you upload it in the EDS?
23 MR. HOFFMANN: I was about to add that, just in my previous
24 answer, that in fact we have it in the system and the information we have
25 in the system indicates, if I'm not mistaken, that we received this
1 document actually from the accused Jovica Stanisic in 2001. Now, this is
2 something I cannot verify this moment. Obviously I cannot verify where
3 the accused got this document from.
4 JUDGE ORIE: It's -- it's -- it is clear that the witness cannot
5 say anything about the document. At the same time, the document at
6 least, as far as the content is concerned, seems to relate to what is in
7 the knowledge of this witness. Therefore, if there's no challenge to
8 authenticity and if we do have sufficient information about who created
9 the document, what was the purpose of the document, it seems to be a kind
10 of a work document, that's at least what it looks like, it's not signed
11 by anyone. I could have a look at the original, but I suggest that we
12 mark it for identification, that the parties would continue their
13 discussions on where it comes from and what it really means, and that we
14 then decide on admission.
15 Madam Registrar, this document to be marked for identification
16 would receive number ...
17 THE REGISTRAR: It would be D55, marked for identification,
18 Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
20 Please proceed.
21 MR. JORDASH: Thank you. Could I have, please, on e-court --
22 sorry, we've got hard copies because we only decided to use this at the
23 last minute this morning. I apologise for that. While that is being
24 handed out, perhaps we could have on e-court Rule 65 ter 389.
25 Q. Mr. Witness, before looking at that document --
1 MR. JORDASH: While the witness is looking at it, if Your Honours
2 don't mind we can refer to this document straightaway, the paper copy
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
5 MR. JORDASH:
6 Q. Mr. Witness, can you just have a quick look at this document
7 dated the 24th of February, 1992, which is in front of you, not on the
8 e-court, the paper copy.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: We haven't received yet a copy of that document.
10 I've received one translation, but I think that is a second document that
11 may be used later. I haven't seen 65 ter 389 yet in copy.
12 MR. JORDASH: But 389 --
13 JUDGE ORIE: If we have a look at what we received, the Chamber
14 at this moment received two copies of what appear to be the same
15 document: one with a blue tab and the other one with a rosa tab, so
16 apparently a boys and a girls version. Why do we need two, and are they
17 the same?
18 MR. JORDASH: I think you were supposed to be just given one
20 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed.
21 MR. JORDASH:
22 Q. Mr. Witness, I can see you've had a quick flick through this
23 document dated the 24th of February, 1992. A document it looks as if
24 from the left-hand corner is from the federal Secretariat of the
25 Interior. Attached on the first -- the front of the document, the MUP of
1 the Republic of Serbia
2 are sending you the following materials prepared in keeping with the
3 conclusions of the SFRY from its session of 20th of February, 1992. Are
4 you -- and it's signed by -- or certainly stamped and signed by
5 Petar Gracanin.
6 Were you aware of this document or the content in which it
7 purports to describe certain activities?
8 A. I was not aware of this document. I am not aware of it. But I
9 can only conclude as it is stated in the last paragraph that these were
10 prepared by a joint Working Group comprising representatives from the
11 corresponding organs from all three fields of the Republic of Serbian
12 Krajina and from the federal Secretariat of the Interior. And
13 undersigned is Petar Gracanin. I don't -- I am not aware of it because I
14 did not attend the meeting, but in any case experts were involved in
15 developing this plan, and we had nothing to do with it. And, in any
16 case, the mail and communications sent from -- by the minister from -- on
17 behalf of the minister never reached our offices.
18 MR. JORDASH: Can we go into private session, please,
19 Your Honour.
20 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
21 [Private session]
11 Pages 4896-4897 redacted. Private session.
13 [Open session]
14 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
16 MR. JORDASH: Could we please have Rule 65 ter 389 on the
17 e-court, please.
18 Q. Can you please read through this document to yourself. Indicate
19 when you've finished the first page because there's a second page.
20 A. Sorry, I can't see again.
21 MR. JORDASH: Can we magnify that slightly for the witness,
23 Q. Do you want the second page?
24 A. Yes. Well, it seems to me on the basis of this material that it
25 has to do with the republican SUP, the government, and the Presidency,
1 and the Republic of Serbia
2 familiar with this. I really don't know why you're showing me this,
3 because I really have no knowledge whatsoever about this material. All
4 of these officials were from the Republic of Serbia
5 from my ministry.
6 Q. Well, let me just ask you --
7 MR. JORDASH: If we go back to the first page of the English
9 Q. And I want you to just consider this question. If I read from
10 the English version the last three lines of the second paragraph, it
11 says -- in reference to creating a defence system of the Krajina and in
12 reference to the meeting involving Milosevic, Prime Minister Bozovic,
13 Hadzic, and so on, and I quote:
14 "It was accepted that the planning of funds for army and police
15 needs should begin immediately as was done in 1992 via the RSK Ministry
16 of Defence and the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia
17 So my question is: Were you aware of the planning of the funds
18 for the police through the Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia
19 in 1992?
20 A. I think that you are confusing things. You are confusing the
21 interior and the Ministry of Defence. I have nothing whatsoever with the
22 Ministry of Defence of Serbia
23 can talk about things, but I don't know about this.
24 Q. Well, I was focusing more in terms of the police and what you
25 might have known about the funding for the police of the ...
1 A. There is no mention of the police here.
2 Q. "It was accepted that the planning of funds for army and police
3 needs should begin immediately as was done in 1992 via the RSK Ministry
4 of Defence and Ministry of Defence of the Republic of Serbia
5 If you don't know how the police were funded, then just say you
6 don't know and we'll move on.
7 A. I don't know. I don't know.
8 MR. JORDASH: Please, could I tender this exhibit, Your Honours.
9 MR. HOFFMANN: No objection, Your Honours.
10 JUDGE ORIE: Madam Registrar.
11 THE REGISTRAR: This will be Exhibit D57, Your Honours.
12 JUDGE ORIE: And is admitted into evidence.
13 MR. JORDASH:
14 Q. Let me turn then to your specific evidence which I hope you will
15 be able to answer some questions on. Do you accept, Mr. Witness, that by
16 the time the federal MUP building was taken over in Belgrade, the former
18 A. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, that's what existed, not the
19 SFRY. The FRY existed then and went on for quite a while.
20 Q. The Federal Republic of Yugoslavia existed in November of 1992;
21 is that what you're stating?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. And what did it consist of at that point?
24 A. That's October. The Republic of Serbia
25 Republic of Montenegro
1 Q. And the Republic of Serbia
2 co-operating and working together in that federal republic; is that
4 A. Yes, yes. Some people from Montenegro came and worked in the
5 federal organs still.
6 Q. The federal MUP as had existed before the new federal arrangement
7 no longer existed, did it? Let me simplify that. The federal MUP as
8 existed before the outbreak of war co-ordinated various republics and
9 regions which no longer needed to be co-ordinated, the federal state now
10 existing of only Serbia
11 A. The federal MUP did exist. Of course, they no longer had
12 authority over the republics that had stepped out of the SFRY. We
13 co-ordinated work in Serbia
14 personnel involved, and the scope of our work was therefore narrower as
16 Q. So the scope of the federal MUP's work consisted at that point,
17 the point when the building was taken over, of co-ordinating Serbia
18 Montenegrin MUPs; that's it, isn't it?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. So when the Serbian MUP took over the federal MUP building, it
21 was effectively taking over a building rather than any usurpation of
22 federal MUP responsibilities; is that not correct?
23 A. Well, I cannot give a mere yes or no answer because there are
24 some things there that are unclear. Beforehand, we had less co-operation
25 with Serbia
1 more co-operation with the Serbian SUP and with the security service of
2 the Republic of Serbia
3 personnel, and we had no more co-operation with Montenegro either.
4 Some people from the federal ministry transferred to the
5 republican ministry, some went to Montenegro
6 us who were dedicated enough to stay where we had been. But we no longer
7 had the same function.
8 Q. Most of the non-Serbian and Montenegrin employees of the federal
9 MUP had left and returned to their various republics prior to the
10 take-over of the federal MUP building by the Serbian MUP; is that
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. The responsibilities left for the federal MUP by the time the
14 building was taken over were extremely limited in scope compared to what
15 had been before the breakdown of the old federal state?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. Is it correct that within the federal MUP building there were big
18 stores of confidential material, papers, reports, and so on?
19 A. The federal MUP, I'm talking about the service now, the state
20 security service, it had its own analysis department and its
22 Q. And was that documentation going missing?
23 A. You mean during the take-over?
24 Q. No.
25 A. Or before that?
1 Q. Before the take-over. As employees left to go to their
2 respective republics, was material, confidential -- state confidential
3 material going missing and being taken to the various republics?
4 A. Well, yes, yes. That was felt. Some documents had gone missing.
5 Some files that I could check myself, persons who were of security
6 interest, for instance, their files, I could no longer access information
7 about such individuals.
8 Q. Was that a concern to the federal MUP that state secret,
9 confidential material was disappearing out of the federal MUP building?
10 A. Well, they were concerned. I mean, I don't know, at that time
11 none of the structures involved didn't do a thing. Everybody was
12 wondering what was going on, but no one took any steps.
13 MR. JORDASH: Could I just take instructions, please.
14 [Stanisic Defence counsel and Stanisic accused confer]
15 MR. JORDASH:
16 Q. Were you aware of Mr. Spasic, member of the federal DB, being
17 arrested at the border carrying secret and confidential documents taken
18 from the federal MUP?
19 A. I know Bozidar Spasic who worked with me in my administration.
20 After 1990 when there was this re-organisation, he was attached to my
21 administration, and beforehand he was in the third administration. If
22 you are talking about Boza Spasic, I know him.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, the question was whether you were aware of him
24 being arrested crossing a border in the possession of documents. Could
25 you please carefully listen to the question and focus your answer on what
1 is asked.
2 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I don't know about that.
3 MR. JORDASH:
4 Q. Did the federal MUP also contain highly expensive and sensitive
5 electronic listening devices?
6 A. I cannot say, because that is not my line of work. When I needed
7 something technical, as it were, I had to address that department with a
8 request explaining what I needed and when, but I cannot really discuss it
9 in any specific detail.
10 Q. Okay. Let's simplify this. As the federal state broke down, the
11 federal MUP building became vulnerable to thieves, and state confidential
12 material started to disappear; is that fair?
13 A. It was to start earlier, before the building had actually been
14 taken over; and as the disintegration took place, everything was speeded
15 up, more and more material was taken away and went missing.
16 Q. So is it fair to say that you were not surprised, you and other
17 colleagues were not surprised that the Serbian MUP came in and took the
18 building over?
19 A. No, I was surprised.
20 Q. Well, what had the federal MUP done to protect the state
21 confidential material within the building?
22 A. I don't know.
23 Q. Had you -- were you aware of an agreement made between Gracanin
24 and Sokolovic that the building belonging to the federal MUP should be
25 taken over by the Serbian MUP?
1 A. At the time, Gracanin was not minister of the interior. I mean,
2 he was not federal minister of the interior. It was Pavle Bulatovic.
3 Q. An earlier agreement between Gracanin and Sokolovic, an agreement
4 which had culminated in a court process which the Serbian republic had
5 won, if I can put it in the colloquial?
6 A. I don't know.
7 Q. And that the agreement had been formed a year or so before the
8 building was taken over, but the federal MUP had not kept the agreement;
9 are you aware of that?
10 A. I personally was not aware of that. I believe that other
11 colleagues didn't know about it either because otherwise we would have
12 discussed it at our own level. We at our level were not aware of that.
13 We were all surprised when we heard that the building had been taken
14 over. Now, whether there had been some other agreement at a different
15 level, administerial level, I don't know about that.
16 Q. Okay. If you don't know, then I'll move on from that subject.
17 With one last issue: It was the public security who are responsible for
18 taking over the federal MUP building, wasn't it?
19 A. I cannot confirm that. However, I can confirm that when I was
20 called in on that day to take my own things there were some people from
21 the state security waiting for me there at that meeting.
22 Q. What was the role of the state security, according to you?
23 A. Well, I think it was decisive.
24 Q. What does that mean?
25 A. Well, that means that as for my contacts with whom I had worked
1 together for a while in the service both in Kosovo and Belgrade, I found
2 them in front of the building on that day. They were waiting for me
3 there. I was surprised, personally. I mean, if we are in closed
4 session, I can tell you who these individuals are who I addressed.
5 Q. I don't need to know at the moment who they were, but am I
6 correct that, from what you've told us before, there were but two or
7 three people from the DB, and the remainder of the people present were
8 public security employees?
9 A. Well, two or three of those that I saw here were from the state
10 security service. As for this physical take-over, the security, I mean
11 not everybody from the state security can be in uniform; these
12 Special Forces and everybody primarily -- state security primarily did
13 not wear uniforms.
14 Q. Okay, well let me -- let's leave it there. You saw two or three
15 people from the state security service. How many other people were
17 A. Well, as for the uniformed police, there were a lot more of them
18 around the building, at the entrance, in the hall. And on every floor
19 almost there were two or three who were fully armed.
20 Q. Let's move to another subject.
21 MR. JORDASH: Can we go into private session, please.
22 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private .
23 [Private session]
11 Pages 4907-4910 redacted. Private session.
14 [Open session]
15 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
17 MR. JORDASH: Now, could we have 26, please, on both the B/C/S
18 and the English.
19 Q. While that's being found, Mr. Witness, let's -- you recall your
20 evidence yesterday that when you arrived in the region you were told that
21 the Serbian state security service was involved in the SBWS, and that
22 service was organising activities on the territory of the SAO Krajina? I
23 just said SBWS, and I meant SAO Krajina.
24 Do you recall that evidence from yesterday? You were told in a
25 meeting in Sibenik upon your arrival of the involvement of the state
1 security service from Serbia
2 A. Well, I think what I said was that Vice Vukojevic said that
3 either the ministry of -- or the police of Serbia had their presence in
5 wreaking havoc in Croatia
6 that was said there, but I think we meant the same thing.
7 Q. You claimed that yesterday that you were given that information
8 at the first meeting upon your arrival in Sibenik; is that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 MR. JORDASH: Let's have a look at the statement you gave to the
11 Prosecution in 2004. Paragraph 26, talking about your arrival. We can
12 go to paragraph 25 so we get the context.
13 Q. 25 you talk about the arrival in Sibenik, your meeting with --
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Your meeting with certain Croatian officials. Do you see that?
16 A. Yes, I do.
17 Q. And 26:
18 "The Croatian side highlighted their concerns, especially in
19 relation to the Knin Krajina and Baranja. They indicated that
20 Milan Martic, with a group of policemen, separated himself from the
21 Croatian MUP and took over the station in Knin. He refused to recognise
22 Croatian authorities and in particular MUP of Croatia acting according to
23 his own will. Based on Croatian information, the Serbian authorities
24 from Belgrade
25 information about who in particular controlled Milan Martic from
2 at this initial meeting."
3 Was that correct when you told the Prosecution that in 2004?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Was paragraph 27 correct when you told that to the Prosecution in
6 2004, that the Croatian officials asked you to influence Martic? Was
7 that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Was paragraph 28 correct, that the Croatian officials outlined
10 problems in and around Gospic as another place of potential conflict
11 between Croats and Serbs? Is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 MR. JORDASH: Can we please go to paragraph 28 in the B/C/S.
14 Thank you.
15 Q. So in 2004 you appeared to be telling the Prosecution that at the
16 initial meeting you were told two essential things. One is that Martic
17 is creating an independent police authority, and, two, according to
18 paragraph 28, that you should use your influence over paramilitaries in
19 Krajina, for example, volunteers trained by Captain Dragan. That appears
20 to be the information that was given to you in the first meeting,
21 according to you, in 2004.
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. So no mention of the influence of the Serbian DB when you first
24 gave your account to the Prosecution; why is that?
25 A. This was a meeting held at the high level. We did not go into
1 details, nor about specific tasks of services. So when you mention the
2 federal Secretariat of the Interior, they meant both the state security
3 and the public security because there was our assistant minister and also
4 the deputy of the Croatian Ministry of the Interior, Mr. Vukojevic. They
5 did not go into a lot of detail, and we were pulled out in order not to
6 increase frictions at the very outset. Maybe I failed to mention that.
7 Q. Sorry, maybe you failed to mention the involvement of the
8 Serbian DB in your statement to the Prosecution in 2004. Wasn't that the
9 most significant piece of information you were given at that first
10 meeting, if what you said yesterday was true, that the activities of
11 Martic in 1991 were in some, if not large part, the result of the
12 Serbian DB? Wasn't that the most significant piece of information you
13 received at that meeting?
14 A. No, because, as I said, the first meeting was more a meeting of
15 introductions, a courtesy meeting, so we didn't really go into details,
16 and we didn't try to establish anything on the spot. We -- and that's
17 how it proceeded. Because a deputy minister would not discuss details or
18 individuals, but there was just a general remark that they knew that the
19 Serbian MUP had its presence there. And later on with Branko Polizota
20 who was in charge of Sibenik and Knin areas and within whose purview it
21 was to conduct or carry out the duties of the state security, he then
22 explained to me further, and I can clearly recall his words, he said, The
23 Serbian service is wreaking havoc in Krajina in Croatia.
24 Q. But that's the point I'm seeking to ask you about. You were told
25 that the Serbian service was wreaking havoc, and yet when you speak to
1 the Prosecution in 2004, that piece of information appears to slip your
2 mind. Why is that?
3 A. I don't really remember.
4 Q. Yesterday you gave evidence that having been given that
5 information in the preliminary meeting, you didn't ask any further
6 questions because you didn't want to go into it further because that
7 would lead to strained relations. Exactly what strained relations would
8 it have led to, asking Croatian officials to give you chapter and verse
9 on the involvement of the Serbian DB wreaking havoc on Croatian
11 MR. JORDASH: Your Honours, page 36 of the transcript from
12 yesterday, the draft transcript.
13 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] When we were told -- when we were
14 sent there by Mr. Petar Gracanin, we were told at a meeting we held
15 together that we should try and put ourselves in the situation as it was
16 in the field in order to avoid deepening the rift or conflicts, in order
17 to try and establish some kind of peaceful -- a peaceful relationship
18 with the people from Croatia
21 (redacted). And on the Croatian side
22 it was only Mr. Vice Vukojevic, the deputy minister of the Croatian
23 police or the Croatian ministry - I don't recall what it was called.
24 Q. So you are saying it wasn't your particular job to ask the
25 question; is that the sum of what you've just told us?
1 A. At that meeting. At that particular meeting, yes. Because it
2 was a preliminary meeting, a courtesy meeting. It wasn't a working
3 meeting. (redacted)
7 Q. Okay. So the Croatian officials told you about Martic and gave
8 you details about that; correct?
9 A. Well, it depends on what you are referring to, what details.
10 Q. You were asked to influence Martic to recognise Croatian laws; is
11 that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. You were asked to use influence over the named paramilitaries of
14 Captain Dragan; is that correct?
15 A. Correct.
16 Q. What were you asked to do about the Serbian DB?
17 A. In my conversation with Branko Polizota, I had the task to review
18 the work of that service at that centre, and I'm now talking about my own
19 personal task. I had come from Belgrade
20 direct contact I had.
21 Q. What were you asked to do at that meeting about the Serbian DB
22 and the havoc they were wreaking on Croatian territory?
23 A. We weren't asked to do anything. We were just told -- it was --
24 they said, We know that the Serbian service is wreaking havoc in Krajina.
25 But they didn't really ask of us to do anything specific. They just
1 wanted to inform us of that.
2 MR. JORDASH: Can we go to paragraph 30 on e-court, please, the
3 same exhibit.
4 JUDGE ORIE: And may I invite you to have a look at the clock,
5 Mr. Jordash. We are about at the time where we have a break, so I leave
6 it to you when you would --
7 MR. JORDASH: Your Honour, this is a good time. I was just about
8 to deal with something slightly different.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Then we will do that after the break. Could
10 you give us an indication as to how much time you'd still need?
11 MR. JORDASH: 45 minutes, I think.
12 JUDGE ORIE: 45 minutes. Could the Simatovic Defence inform the
13 Chamber on how much time they would need once Mr. Jordash has finished?
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, as things stand now
15 I believe we will need an hour, although it is difficult to tell because
16 I'm not quite sure how the remaining of my colleague Jordash's
17 cross-examination would develop.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, we, therefore, need a little bit more than one
19 session. If you could try to, one session being 75 minutes, we need more
20 than that; nevertheless, may I urge you to see how efficient you can be
21 in the cross-examination.
22 We'll have a break, and we'll resume at five minutes past 4.00.
23 --- Recess taken at 3.36 p.m.
24 --- On resuming at 4.10 p.m.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Jordash, just for your guidance, the Chamber has
1 no problem if you want to explore why a witness didn't say anything in a
2 previous statement, and, of course, after half a page we all understand
3 that it comes to your mind that it may be that that it was only invented
4 later, whatever. But there must be a reason for that. That point is
5 clear for us after half a page. And, of course, if you you want to use
6 another half a page to see whether you can elicit more, but -- then for
7 the second page on -- going on the same ground, then -- this is the kind
8 of things we are thinking about, similarly, to some extent, about whether
9 there was a court proceedings before the building was taken over. It --
10 we are totally lost on what the exact relevance of that is. We do not
11 stop you because at a certain moment it may come out, but looking at it
12 back afterwards, well, whether the building was taken over after court
13 proceedings or without court proceedings and what those court proceedings
14 may have been about -- it's -- we do not know whether we have heard
15 anything of relevance for us or not. And it took quite a bit of time.
16 MR. JORDASH: Yes, I hear Your Honours. In relation to the first
17 point, absolutely. I understand Your Honours's point, and I will take
18 that completely on board. In relation to the second point, from the
19 Defence perspective we don't quite understand why that issue was an
20 important one for the Prosecution, they put it into the pre-trial brief,
21 that the take-over of the MUP was somehow significant. And we were
22 establishing it wasn't that significant, given what was happening at the
23 time on the ground and given the court proceedings. But I take
24 Your Honour's point.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, but then to hear a lot of what the witness
1 doesn't know about it is -- but that helps in undermining the relevance
2 of it is questionable. But we didn't stop you because we think that it's
3 for you. But finally, to prioritise subjects or to spend more time or
4 less time on certain matters, we leave it in your hands, but you know
5 that we also would like to have a cross-examination as efficient as
6 possible. Now, this took us exactly three minutes. Let's get moving
8 MR. JORDASH: Yes.
9 Q. I wanted to take you straightaway, Mr. Witness, to paragraph 30
10 of -- I hope we are in open session. I have a feeling we are not.
11 Please could we move into open session.
12 JUDGE ORIE: I think we are. If you look at your video screen,
13 you usually see "PS" for private session. And if nothing appears, we are
14 usually in open session.
15 MR. JORDASH: Thank you.
16 Q. In paragraph 30, Mr. Witness - and I want to try to move
17 quickly - states:
18 "I also later realised that this was not by accident, but that
19 these barricades were centrally organised by Milan Martic and
21 Did you tell the Prosecution that, and is that correct?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Moving down that paragraph, for example, there were posters in
24 the barricades with the text "Martic, we are with you." Many elements
25 pointed to the direction of Milan Martic. I believe that at some point
1 the police had emblems with Martic or "Marticevci" written on them which
2 was only later replaced with emblems of "Milicija SAO Krajine." Did you
3 tell the Prosecution that, and was it correct?
4 A. Yes.
5 MR. JORDASH: Could I ask you, please, for paragraph 39 to be
6 brought up on the screen. And in the English too.
7 Q. And is it correct, from looking at the last three lines referring
8 to the barricades, these barricades were manned by Marticevci together
9 with some local Serbs from the villages. Marticevci were dressed in
10 regular blue police uniforms. Are those two sentences correct? Did you
11 tell that to the Prosecution?
12 A. Let me just find that spot, I apologise. The 39th paragraph?
13 What line is it in?
14 Q. Sorry, the last --
15 A. The last portion? Yes, I see it. Yes.
16 Q. So at the time you gave your statement in 2004, the problems you
17 identified in Knin involved one, Martic and Babic and the creation of
18 barricades with local Serbs, and secondly, the Knindzas with
19 Captain Dragan; do you accept that?
20 A. Yes.
21 MR. JORDASH: Can we go to paragraph 32, please.
22 Q. Which reads:
23 "We were supposed to monitor the peace agreement, so we went to
24 the field on visited the crisis areas. I recall that the situation in
25 the field was completely different than it was described in Belgrade
1 during the briefing with Petar Gracanin. He told us that we would be
2 welcomed by the Croatian authorities and Serbs in Croatia in order to
3 help both sides to keep the peace. When we arrived in Croatia, we
4 realised that nobody really wanted us there and that both sides looked at
5 us suspiciously, often seeing us as spies for the other side."
6 Is that correct?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. Paragraph 33.
9 MR. JORDASH: Please could we go into private session for this.
10 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
11 [Private session]
11 Page 4922 redacted. Private session.
21 [Open session]
22 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
23 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
24 MR. JORDASH:
25 Q. I want to refer to you --
1 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, I think -- sorry, could we go back to
2 private session. I just want to be ultra-cautious.
3 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
4 [Private session]
11 Pages 4925-4926 redacted. Private session.
4 [Open session]
5 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
7 MR. JORDASH:
8 Q. What connection were you seeking to make between Ulemek and
9 Dragan? I don't follow that piece of testimony.
10 A. Well, the connection is in that no one could, without the
11 approval of certain individuals in the service or the police or
12 politicians of the then-Serbia, could be there especially if we have in
13 mind a past of Captain Dragan or Legija. And I'm referring now to the
14 time when I was in the service. These were individuals who had been
15 trained in -- abroad or in some paramilitary units, and Legija, after
16 all, was named after the legion of foreigners, and they had -- their own
17 personal past was somewhat stained, so they couldn't really come to
19 Q. But are you referring there when you speak of Legija Ulemek being
20 the leader of the special unit of the Serbian MUP to his command role in
21 the JSO in 1996?
22 A. In 1996?
23 Q. Yes.
24 A. Well, yes, I'm referring to that same individual.
25 Q. So you are saying someone had to give Dragan permission to come
1 to Knin, that could be a politician, it could be the police, or it could
2 be the state security service; is that correct?
3 A. Well, certainly a responsible individual, an official. I can't
4 be sure whether this would have been someone from the service or a
5 political -- a politician. I really don't know. I couldn't know who it
6 might have been.
7 Q. But what's that got to do with Legija being the commander of the
8 JSO in 1996? I don't understand the connection you are making.
9 A. Well, the connection is that both Legija and Captain Dragan had
10 the same kind of personal history. Their past was criminal. They spent
11 some time, almost simultaneously, at the same time, in the legion of
13 Q. And that's the connection you're making? That's it? The fact
14 that they had a similar past, as you saw it? If that's it, we can move
16 A. Well, that's what was -- what turned out to be true after they
17 were arrested. And do you know that Legija was actually convicted of two
18 crimes in Serbia
19 draw? He was convicted to two prison terms of 40 years.
20 Q. Yeah. For crimes committed in which year, Mr. Witness? Is that
21 the execution of Djindjic?
22 A. Well, yes, that as well as his other activity. That is what he
23 was convicted of. I haven't really been following it closely, but I
24 heard that he was convicted of two crimes, I think, and that he got two
25 40-year prison sentences, one probably for Djindjic and the other one, I
1 don't know exactly.
2 Q. But for crimes in 2000, 2003, or thereabouts, is that not right?
3 A. Well, when was it that Djindjic was killed? Then probably, I
5 JUDGE ORIE: I think that it doesn't assist the Chamber to
6 explore this matter any further.
7 Let's please proceed.
8 MR. JORDASH: Please could we have Exhibit 5305 again on the
9 e-court. And I want to go to paragraph 45 of the B/C/S and the English.
10 Q. Please could you read out the first line of paragraph 45,
11 Mr. Witness. If you would read it out aloud, please.
12 A. 45 you said? You meant 45?
13 Q. I did, yes.
14 A. "I personally did not see Jovica Stanisic, the head of the DB of
17 the SAO Krajina DB. We talked amongst ourselves that Stanisic
18 occasionally comes to Knin to participate in the training of the
19 SAO Krajina DB officers ."
20 Q. So am I correct you told the Prosecution that you personally did
21 not see Stanisic in Knin?
22 A. That is correct. It's the way it is written in this statement.
23 That's exactly what I said. My first reaction was Martic and the
24 investigation involved. I didn't want to bring other people into the
25 picture. It wasn't Stanisic who was discussed. All attention was
1 focused on Martic. Later on as well, later on as well I made some
2 corrections when I remembered what had happened, and then I altered some
3 of my positions. When I contacted the Prosecutor and the investigators,
4 I corrected my views in relation to Stanisic.
5 Q. Well, I've got 15 minutes left, so I'm going to go quickly.
6 Your explanation for why you told the Prosecution that you did
7 not see Mr. Stanisic is that you wanted to focus your attention on
8 Martic. Is that the explanation you give for the inconsistency between
9 what you now say and what you told the Prosecution in 2004?
10 A. I presented my position in the investigation. They insisted that
11 I say what the situation was in respect of Martic. We did not exactly
12 focus on other individuals.
13 Q. [Previous translation continues] ... that's your explanation,
14 let's move on.
15 Did you tell the Prosecution that you heard from some colleagues
16 that the DB of Serbia organised courses for police officers in order to
17 create the SAO Krajina DB?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. Did you tell the Prosecution that you talked amongst yourselves
20 that Stanisic came to Knin occasionally to participate in the training of
21 the SAO Krajina DB officers?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Did you, and I suggest you did not, ever say to the Prosecution
24 in 2004 that Stanisic, head of the DB of Serbia, was responsible for
25 wreaking havoc in Croatia
1 A. I did not say that.
2 Q. Thank you.
3 A. Chaos or havoc, as Polizota said to me.
4 MR. JORDASH: Let's turn to paragraph 76 of the same exhibit,
6 Q. Did you -- look at paragraph 76, please, and I'll read it:
7 "I knew that the following paramilitaries were in the region of
8 Eastern Slavonia
9 by Radovan Stojicic, aka Badza, men of Vuk Draskovic, and Seselj."
10 Did you tell the Prosecution that that is what you knew about the
11 paramilitaries in the region of Eastern Slavonia when you gave your
12 statement in 2004?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Did you --
15 MR. JORDASH: Please could we go into private session for a
17 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
18 [Private session]
24 [Open session]
25 MR. JORDASH:
1 Q. On the 11th of February, 2008, whilst being proofed by --
2 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
3 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
4 MR. JORDASH: Sorry.
5 Q. On the 11th of February, 2008, while being proofed with
6 Mr. Hoffmann, you, in paragraph 16, for the first time announce that you
7 heard about Frenki having some form of paramilitary unit which was
8 problematic in the SBWS. And let me just read you the most significant
10 "In the evening they met," and you are referring to two men
11 there --
12 A. I don't have that, sorry.
13 Q. Paragraph 16. You have that?
14 And I'm looking at --
15 MR. JORDASH: Please could this not be shown to the public.
16 Thank you.
17 Q. I'm looking at where it says two names went to the area around
19 Frenki's Men as most problematic, also the White Eagles. Frenki's Men
20 and White Eagles were acting independent.
21 Did you tell the Prosecution that in a proofing session in 2008?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. So could you explain how we go from 2004, no mention of Frenki
24 having any involvement in SBWS, to 2008 when he is the biggest problem
25 there is?
1 A. My colleagues, the persons mentioned there, that seems to have
3 Q. Well, the question is a simply one, and I don't think you need to
4 necessarily look at the note. The question is: What accounts for the
5 difference? No Frenki 2004, biggest problem Frenki 2008?
6 A. Well, perhaps my memory came back to me. I don't know how else
7 to interpret it, but it is a fact that that's what's written there.
8 Q. Thank you.
9 Paragraph 17:
10 "The witness had no information re the involvement of the
11 Serbian DB in the SBWS."
12 MR. JORDASH: Can we have 17 of the B/C/S, please.
13 Q. Did you tell the Prosecution that?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Was that true? You didn't hear anything, see anything, record
16 anything, have any information about the Serbian DB in the SBWS despite
17 your functions in that location?
18 A. I was actually trying to pacify things there. I did not focus on
19 the Serbian service. I did not pay attention to the activities of the
20 Serbian service. And I stand by that.
21 Q. And why is it, Mr. Witness, if you were truly told that the
22 Serbian DB was playing such a malign role in the Knin region, that you
23 didn't, when you saw Mr. Stanisic, have a word with him about it, merely
24 passing by or waving hello?
25 A. It was two points. I can't remember which came first. Once it
1 was in front of the building when I was with my colleague; we were either
2 going to Martic or we were going out. At any rate, there was that one
3 contact. Hello, hello, that was it. And the second time at the Krka
5 Q. We know what you say happened. I'm just asking why, given the
6 information you claim to have received about the role of the DB, was it
7 when you saw the, let's put it neutrally, a high-ranking member of the
8 DB, that you didn't take the opportunity to sit down with him and have a
9 word with him?
10 A. In certain situations I was just supposed to report about what I
11 saw on the spot. Likewise, we had a leader of our group and then we were
12 told what kind of details we could go into, who we could talk to. My
13 superior probably hadn't given me approval to establish that kind of
15 Q. Okay. Thank you. Could I suggest the reason you didn't speak to
16 him, just so that I put my case to you clearly, was because you didn't
17 see him, and you were never told in 1991 that he or the DB had any
18 involvement in wreaking havoc in the Krajina.
19 A. I never said chaos. I said havoc. You can ask for the
20 transcripts of our meeting with Vice Vukojevic. There's a record of
21 that, everything that was discussed there. Not with Polizota, that was
22 not recorded. I did keep some records.
23 MR. JORDASH: Could we go into --
24 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] A diary too, but that went missing.
25 MR. JORDASH: I've just got, I think, two or three more
1 questions. Could we go into private session, please.
2 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
3 [Private session]
11 Page 4937 redacted. Private session.
17 [Open session]
18 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you.
20 Mr. Jordash, what I wanted to read to the document is the seven
21 lines following a line starting with "not at that point," and I must say
22 that that's at the 88th page. Perhaps you first read it.
23 MR. JORDASH: I have it, Your Honour, yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: In all fairness, I ...
25 And I read it. Yes. So that you are -- that you know what I'm
1 going to read.
2 Witness, a portion was read to you of the testimony you've given
3 earlier. I would like to read one answer you gave and want to verify
4 whether that would be an answer you would still give today. And I first
5 read the question to you. It follows the passage where you were talking
6 about the conversation you had when you were in that helicopter flying
7 above the fortress in Knin. And then you were asked the following
9 "Do you know, when the word Captain Dragan was used to identify
10 this person, do you know who was being talked about? Can you identify
11 that person?"
12 And then your answer was the following:
13 "Not at that point, no. But later on we learned more about him
14 when we met various individuals in the field and also privately later on
15 through my life when I returned from the field. But at the time he said
16 he was an expert in combat, that he had completed some sort of military
17 courses, terrorist, anti-terrorist, somewhere in the west, and that for
18 the time being he was conducting training of the Knindzas, or rather,
19 these Serb forces in the area."
20 Is that what you testified at the time, and is the testimony
22 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes, it is accurate. Perhaps I did
23 not describe it in specifics. We couldn't really have the conversation
24 in the helicopter. It was too noisy. This was a military helicopter.
25 There was a lot of wind noise. But then when we landed, then, of course,
1 we asked Zec who was this and then he just told us briefly that this was
2 some person who had completed some courses abroad, and then later on we
3 tried to gather as much information as we could about this man.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Now, the line in your testimony "but at the time he
5 said that he was an expert in combat," do I understand that the first
6 "he" is Zec and that the second "he" is Captain Dragan? Is that how I
7 have to understand it?
8 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] No, no, no. No. Admiral Zec.
9 JUDGE ORIE: But let me now read it then again.
10 "But at the time he said that he was an expert in combat, that he
11 had completed some sort of military courses, terrorist, anti-terrorist,
12 somewhere in the west, and that for the time being he was conducting
13 training of the Knindzas, or rather, Serb forces in the area."
14 Now, who told you all this? And who you refer to when you said
15 that the person had completed military courses and that he was conducting
17 Could you please clarify because this is ambiguous testimony.
18 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] We were told so by Admiral Zec. As
19 for the information about his training, about the training and the
20 terrorist or anti-terrorist courses, that part related to Captain Dragan.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, and also the training of the Knindzas, that
22 referred also to Captain Dragan; is that well understood?
23 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] Yes.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Now, the last portion of this evidence is:
25 "... and that for the time being he was conducting training of
1 the Knindzas, or rather, the Serb forces in the area."
2 Do I understand that Admiral Zec told you that Captain Dragan was
3 conducting training of the Knindzas and that he then -- that either you
4 or he corrected himself and made it broader, saying the Knindzas, or
5 rather, the Serb forces in the area? Do you remember whether you
6 corrected while giving testimony what you said or that it was Admiral Zec
7 who initially said something about Knindzas and then made it broader by
8 saying "or rather these Serb forces"?
9 THE WITNESS: [Interpretation] I believe that he used the term
10 Serbian volunteers. The Knindzas and Serbian volunteers.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you for that answer.
12 I explored this because that testimony, of course, is not
13 evidence, and that's the reason why I dealt with that matter.
14 Mr. Hoffmann.
15 MR. HOFFMANN: If you allow me, I would just put on the record
16 that the running page number of that reference was transcript 1084.
17 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Yes. Thank you for that assistance.
18 We have some more time to go. Mr. Petrovic, are you ready to
19 cross-examine the witness?
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] I am, Your Honour.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Witness JF-038, you will now be cross-examined by
22 Mr. Petrovic, and Mr. Petrovic is counsel for Mr. Simatovic.
23 Please proceed.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours.
25 Could we now please move to private session.
1 JUDGE ORIE: We move into private session.
2 [Private session]
11 Pages 4943-4947 redacted. Private session.
19 [Open session]
20 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
21 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar. Mr. Petrovic, the same
22 message to you as we sent to Mr. Jordash. The matter you are dealing
23 with in private session, it's perfectly clear what is on your mind, and
24 none of your questions expresses that clearly. It is about bias and
25 getting favours, and that's what is on your mind apparently as a
1 possibility. Next time, just ask the witness about it, rather than
2 making all kind of movements around the hot potato. And then you could
3 also do it in five minutes instead of in 15 minutes.
4 We'll resume at 10 minutes to -- yes, Mr. Groome.
5 MR. GROOME: Just briefly, Your Honour, the next witness is on
6 stand by outside; do you think that we will get to him today?
7 JUDGE ORIE: I would not exclude that, since we have to use our
8 time as good as we can, and since Mr. Petrovic knows that the time he
9 uses and the time he wants to use also depends on how he conducts his
10 cross-examination and that the Chamber will consider that in granting
11 time. There's a chance -- there's a fair chance that we would start with
12 the next witness.
13 We'll resume at ten minutes to 6.00.
14 --- Recess taken at 5.24 p.m.
15 --- On resuming at 5.52 p.m.
16 JUDGE ORIE: Before we restart, the Defence is informed that the
17 Chamber expects a response on a motion in relation to Witness JF-035 by
18 Monday close of business. Of course, the Chamber has used its power here
19 to shorten the time-limits under Rule 126 bis, I think it is.
20 MR. JORDASH: Sorry, could I just clarify --
21 JUDGE ORIE: The motion was filed the 7th of May. That's from
22 what I remember.
23 MR. JORDASH: When you say expect a response, if we want to
25 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, if you want to respond. If you do not wish to
1 respond, then, of course, it's always appreciated if you give notice of
2 that so that we don't have to wait if or --
3 MR. JORDASH: Yes, Your Honour. Thank you.
4 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. No, it's -- we are not insisting on a
5 response. But if you wish to respond, it should be done -- the
6 time-limit is Monday close of business.
7 Yes, please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.
8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. Witness, before the break you told us that around the
10 15th of August you came to Osijek
11 to Baranja. Is it true that you were in Baranja until the end
12 of September?
13 A. I cannot recall exactly when I had left, on which date. I had
14 been cut off from my superiors. I know that one day towards the end of
15 September I established contact with minister Petar Gracanin and asked
16 him what to do next. I had no conditions for work whatsoever. I have no
17 contacts, and I cannot report to anyone.
18 Q. Witness, I really have to interrupt you at this point. I'm
19 asking you whether it's correct that you stayed there until the end of
20 September? It just requires a simple answer.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. Thank you. Tell us, please, over that month and more that you
23 spent in Baranja, what were the paramilitary units that were in Baranja?
24 A. Out in the field with the population, it was mostly elderly
25 people --
1 Q. I have to interrupt you straightaway. Which units were in
3 A. In Baranja, there were Seselj's units, Vuk Draskovic's, then the
4 White Eagles, then Arkan's Men, then Badza with his units, and
5 Frenki's Men with their units. Maybe I missed someone, but I really
6 cannot remember anymore. That's it. That's what I established. I
7 established their presence there.
8 Q. During your stay there for about a month, did you see any of
9 these paramilitary units?
10 A. No.
11 Q. Did you move about Baranja over that month and more than that,
12 the time that you spent there?
13 A. At first, yes. Later on, the security situation did not permit
14 me to do so. I did not have a vehicle made available to me, so, when
15 necessary, I used a military vehicle, and that also depended on what the
16 availability was.
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] 65 ter 5305, that's the document
18 that I would like shown to this witness, paragraph 76, and in B/C/S it's
19 the same paragraph.
20 Q. I'm going to read out to you the last sentence in that
21 paragraph --
22 JUDGE ORIE: One second. Document not to be shown to the public.
23 Could you please not forget to indicate that.
24 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. So could
25 the document please not be displayed publicly. And I would like to ask
1 for page 76 -- or paragraph, rather, 76 in both languages.
2 Q. Witness, could you please read the last sentence in paragraph 76.
3 Could you please read it out loud, this last sentence.
4 A. "As far as I knew at that time, those paramilitaries had not been
5 operating in Baranja because the area was under control of the JNA."
6 Q. Witness, is that what you said to the investigators in 2004 as
7 stated here?
8 A. Please read the first sentence. You read the first sentence.
9 Q. I'm the one who is putting questions to you, and you answer my
10 question. Is this what you said to the investigators?
11 A. Yes.
12 JUDGE ORIE: The witness was responding to your question by
13 pointing at another part of the interview. He is allowed to do so and
14 should not be interrupted when doing it. Please proceed.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
16 Q. So, Mr. Witness, you said that in Baranja, there weren't any
17 paramilitary units; is that correct?
18 A. At one point in time. And I said, exactly, that there weren't
19 any. I mean, but that was at one moment, at one point in time.
20 Q. Now, tell us why you changed your statement in this respect
21 today, six years later?
22 A. It wasn't today. It was earlier on. I changed some of my views
23 and some of my statements because I remembered certain things. I
24 remembered things that happened in relation to the paramilitaries. I
25 said that Mate Tenjajic, the commander of the barracks in Beli Manastir,
1 on that day when I saw him, because we used to meet every morning, he
2 informed me that on that day some Serb forces were coming in. And I
3 said, Who? And he said, Well, it's your people, all of them. And I
4 said, How come you know that? He said, That's what my security people
5 said to me. Do you want to meet them? And I said, No, there's no need.
6 So I didn't meet with them, I didn't contact them. So that's the
7 answer to your previous question as to whether I saw any of them.
8 Q. Why didn't you say that to the investigators, or is it the case
9 that no one asked you about that?
10 A. Maybe they didn't ask me about that, perhaps I didn't remember
11 myself at the time. I really don't know. I'm sorry that I'm speaking so
12 fast actually. Perhaps I did not remember.
13 Q. So what jogged your memory 19 years later?
14 A. Perhaps it's less. It's not 19 years ago, well, now it's 19
15 years ago, but ... well, anyway, a lot of things have gone through my
17 Q. That means that perhaps you don't remember things exactly as you
18 had put it here, maybe things are different from what you said here?
19 A. That's possibly too, yes.
20 Q. It is possible that as for Frenki's Men, you heard about that a
21 lot later, many years later. And then since it's been so many years,
22 somehow that also got into your memory and interfered in a way; is that
24 A. I wouldn't agree with that. I didn't remember -- I didn't,
25 rather, mention all the names of these units, but I remember very well
1 that Mate Tenjajic said to me that the Serb forces were coming. And
2 that's when we discussed it, which forces.
3 Q. Yesterday you mentioned Beli, the forces of Beli and Giska; is
4 that right, that's what you said yesterday?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Did you hear about the forces of this Beli also being in Baranja?
7 A. Well, was it in Osijek
8 people complained the most about the forces ever Vuk Draskovic, because
9 they were highly disorganised, as I said, and every group operated on its
10 own, and every individual operated on its own too.
11 Q. Did they mention this Giska as well?
12 A. I would like to point out that most of these people were elderly.
13 As for Giska, perhaps we commented on him, myself with Mate Tenjajic.
14 But these older people, they said, Chetniks. And I said, Which Chetniks?
15 What do they look like? Who are these people? And then they tried to do
16 their best.
17 Q. All right. So these units of Giska's, were they in the area of
18 Baranja while you were there?
19 A. Well, now, was it Baranja or Beli Manastir, please don't take my
20 word for it now. I mean, all of that is ...
21 Q. What about the man who belonged to this Beli? Were they in the
22 Beli Manastir or in the area around Osijek
23 A. People complained the most about the White Eagles. And bearing
24 in mind that Giska and Beli operated in those forces of the White Eagles,
1 Q. Did you ever find out which structure this Giska belonged to?
2 A. I think it was the White Eagles at the time.
3 Q. Did you ever find out who Beli belonged to?
4 A. I knew Beli personally because he had a car dump near Belgrade
5 and one of the people from back home also worked there and that's how I
6 saw him pretty often.
7 Q. Did you hear of him when you were in Osijek and --
8 A. Yes, yes, I heard about him.
9 Q. And if I put it to you that Beli was killed on the 4th of August,
10 1991, what are you going to say to that?
11 A. I will agree with that fact of yours as well. I'm saying --
12 well, I knew about Beli -- I mean, I went to this car dump that he had.
13 Now, whether he got killed before that or whatever --
14 Q. Where were you in August 1991?
15 A. Well, I told you on the 15th of August 1991 I went to Osijek
16 THE INTERPRETER: Microphone for Mr. Petrovic, the interpreters
17 cannot hear him.
18 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, you are invited to switch on your
19 microphone. And I additionally invite you to take that pause as well.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour. I beg
21 your pardon. All of this is due to the fact that I'm trying to finish
22 with this witness as soon as possible. I'm doing my best.
23 Q. Where were you up until the 15th of August, 1991, up until the
24 time when you went to Baranja?
13 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
14 JUDGE ORIE: Please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
16 Q. So, during your stay in Belgrade
17 the state security, you did not hear what all of Belgrade and all of
19 hear about that?
20 A. Well, I did not. And if I have to state the reason, I can.
21 Because at that time there were is so many killings of this kind that --
22 Q. Tell us, please, where was it that you heard about Badza's Group?
23 A. In Beli Manastir.
24 Q. Can you tell us who told you about Badza's Group?
25 A. Mate Tenjajic.
1 Q. Where did you hear of the White Eagles? Where?
2 A. I heard it from villagers in Zmajevo, I think, and places like
4 Q. Can you tell us where you heard about the Serb guard?
5 A. I really cannot recall now. I really cannot remember. Really.
6 It's been quite a while.
7 Q. Where did you hear about the Red Berets?
8 A. We knew about the Red Berets. I mean, if you are asking me about
9 where they were staying, well, I did not mention the Red Berets staying
10 in this area.
11 THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter's note: Could all other
12 microphones please be switched off.
13 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
14 Q. In Osijek
15 were no Red Berets; is my understanding correct?
16 A. Not under the name of the Red Berets. Now, I mean, if you are
17 saying that Badza Stojicic and them are the same thing and why I said
18 Badza's Men at some point and whatever, well.
19 Q. Can you explain it to us. Who are Badza's Men? Who is the
20 Serbian guard? Do you make a distinction at all among all of these
21 different groups?
22 A. Well, the Red Berets were units of the MUP. The Serbian guard
23 was Arkan's Group, I think.
24 Q. What about the White Eagles?
25 A. Vuk Draskovic. I mean, well, one of the groups, I mean -- but I
1 think they operated under the SPO.
2 Q. I'm going to tell you that none of that was correct, but I'm not
3 going to ask you for any further comment. I'm now going to move on.
4 Tell me, you mentioned Frenki's Men and you mentioned what
5 Mate Tenjajic had told you. Did you hear about that somewhere else as
6 well while you were there?
7 A. No, I did not hear about that.
8 Q. So you were only told this by Tenjajic; correct?
9 A. Yes, the barracks commander.
10 Q. Tell us, please, where did you have this conversation with
11 Tenjajic when he told you about it?
12 A. In his office.
13 Q. When was this?
14 A. Do you mean what day or what date? I can't recall the date, but
15 it was around 9.00 in the morning, after breakfast. I know because we
16 met every morning.
17 Q. So where was this barrack where this conversation took place?
18 A. It was on the approaches from Beli Manastir, from Bezdan towards
19 Beli Manastir.
20 Q. So what is the closest town?
21 A. Beli Manastir. This was in the town itself. The barrack is on
22 the outskirts of the town.
23 Q. Tell us, please, where were you -- did --
24 THE INTERPRETER: Could the counsel please repeat the question.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, could you please repeat the question.
1 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
2 Q. My question was: In what direction did this convoy take? In
3 what direction did the column go?
4 A. In the direction of the town of Beli Manastir.
5 Q. Where were you while this column was passing?
6 A. I was in Mate Tenjajic's office. I also had an office of my own
7 sort of where I also slept and used as my office.
8 Q. So while this column was moving past, you didn't even look out to
9 see who or what was in the column?
10 A. That's correct, I did not.
11 Q. Why didn't you even glance at who was in the column?
12 A. Because we were told that in the field we could only contact the
13 army representatives.
14 Q. Witness, I'm not asking you about contacts. I'm asking you about
15 why you didn't even take a look at who was in the column. Wasn't that
16 why you were sent there, to provide information about the situation as it
17 was in Beli Manastir area?
18 A. No, I didn't even take a look.
19 Q. Well, were you not even interested in who these forces were, the
20 paramilitary forces coming from Serbia
21 you were charged with?
22 A. I was interested and I was advised by Mate Tenjajic about who it
23 was that was coming in about. And it was a war time situation. I had
24 some bad experience in Beli Manastir at the time, and I was fed up with
25 everything, and I just wanted to get out of there as soon as I could. I
1 didn't even leave the barrack. I ate in the canteen there, and I
2 remained on the spot.
3 Q. Do you know when Bilje was liberated?
4 A. No.
5 Q. Do you know who liberated Bilje?
6 A. I don't know.
7 Q. Do you know whether there was a local police force in
8 Beli Manastir?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Who was at the head of this local police?
11 A. Well, the changes were a daily occurrence. There were Serbian
12 forces there. I remember that for a time there was a certain
13 Boro Dobrokes; he was an older man, some 70 years or so old, that I and
14 Pero Lazukic called and asked to take on the duty of municipal assembly
15 president. We were occasionally informed about the situation in the
16 field, and he was informed of them, but his information was so scarce
17 that it was unreliable. There were daily changes. And I remember that
18 there was a Zuco [phoen] person who was so glorified in the media, radio
19 stations, that he was the best sharp-shooter, that he targeted victims
20 from a silo or somewhere. There was even an instance where a man was
21 killed 5 metres away from me.
22 Q. Well, my question to you was: Was there a presence of the state
23 security in Beli Manastir?
24 A. No. There was only military security. Pero Lazukic was there.
25 Q. Was there a Crisis Staff?
1 A. Yes. Boro Dobrokes, he had a sort of Crisis Staff, and he was
2 also the president of the municipality.
3 Q. Would you please explain to us, in your statement, 65 ter 5305,
4 paragraph 72.
5 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Please do not show this in public.
6 Q. You said:
7 "I found a certain Boro Dobrokesa who used to work for the
8 administration before the war, and I appointed him as a town
9 administrator in Beli Manastir."
10 A. Well, maybe it wasn't written down correctly.
11 Q. Well, please allow me to put my question first. My question is
12 this: Who authorised you to appoint an administrator, a town
13 administrator, in Beli Manastir? Under whose authority did you do that?
14 A. Maybe it wasn't properly translated that this was a town
15 administrator. He came to the barrack himself and said that he was in
16 charge of the Crisis Staff. And Pero Lazukic and I then asked him to
17 take over all the other functions because there was general chaos there.
18 And he told us that there was a problem with some villagers on the
19 border, and there were people coming in from Hungary, crossing over,
20 because it was not secure. We charged him with taking care of that too.
21 Q. Do you know who Stanko Ivanovic [as interpreted] was?
22 A. I don't know. I don't recall.
23 Q. Do you know who Milomir Petkovic is?
24 A. I can't recall.
25 MR. PETROVIC: Your Honours, I asked about Stanko "Trivanovic,"
1 whereas in the transcript it says Stanko "Ivanovic."
2 Q. Do you know who Radoslav Zirlarevic [phoen] is?
3 A. I can't remember.
4 Q. Do you know who Vranic was?
5 A. [No interpretation]
6 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel kindly turn on and off his
7 microphone himself because the interpreters cannot hear the beginning and
8 the end of his question. Thank you.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Stanislav Vranic was the last
10 person I asked about.
11 JUDGE ORIE: Have you heard the request of the interpreters? If
12 you are assisted by switching on and off the microphone, then parts are
13 lost. So it takes some concentration, but would you please try to do it
14 yourself or to instruct your assistants accordingly.
15 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Well, I issued instructions to my
16 assistant, but apparently he's not really complying.
17 JUDGE ORIE: He has had a hard day today, yes.
18 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
19 Q. Witness, do you know which JNA unit took control over Baranja?
20 A. I know that there were some forces in the barrack which took part
21 in that, but which exact units they were, I really don't know.
22 Q. Witness, do you know who General Krstic is?
23 A. I don't. Maybe it rings familiar, but I'm not -- I can't recall
25 Q. Do you know who Colonel Jovanovic was, the commander of the
1 36th Armoured Battalion?
2 A. No.
3 Q. In your statement in paragraph 72, I think we still have it on
4 our monitors.
5 MR. PETROVIC: That's the previous page. If we can just switch
6 pages. And let's -- it shouldn't be shown in public.
7 Q. You say there:
8 "My main task there was to go to the villages around
9 Beli Manastir. I went to the villages and spoke with the people. The
10 people complained that they were being attacked during the night,
11 allegedly by Croats who were crossing in from Hungary." And so on and so
13 I never found anywhere in your statements that you said that you
14 ever stated to the investigators that people complained about
15 paramilitary forces, Serb paramilitary forces, the people that you had
16 conversations with me, and now I would like to ask you why that is so?
17 Why didn't you mention that when you gave this statement in 2006? But
18 you did mention attacks against civilians. So it's obvious that that
19 question was put to you. But you only mentioned the Croats from crossing
20 over from Hungary
21 mention Serbian forces?
22 A. Well, maybe the question wasn't specific about which forces this
23 related to, but is it correct that around the villages near Knezivac
24 there were attacks by Croats. But the villages towards Beli Manastir,
25 towards Darda, Bilje, and Osijek
1 Q. Could you tell me why you did not mention attacks by Serb
2 paramilitary forces against civilians in Baranja? Do you have an answer
3 or don't you have an answer?
4 A. Well, I don't have an answer why I didn't.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann.
6 MR. HOFFMANN: I would just ask that at least we look at the next
7 paragraph where there is mentioning of Serbian snipers.
8 JUDGE ORIE: You mean paragraph 73?
9 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, exactly.
10 JUDGE ORIE: But that's comment rather than ...
11 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, it's a comment about how his prior statement
12 is summarised.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours.
15 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, Mr. Petrovic.
16 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] If I may just reply. Here mention
17 is made of a specific incident, and we've heard about this incident
18 today, so there's nothing -- there's nothing at issue here. So I'm
19 asking about the attacks against the people, the civilians, who remained
20 in villages, attacks by paramilitary forces. There's nothing about that
21 in the statement. As for the other incident, he mentioned that ten
22 minutes ago.
23 If I may continue?
24 JUDGE ORIE: You may continue, and the parties are invited not to
25 give a lot of comment either in re-examination or -- you can ask a
1 question about it or in argument you can point at any incompleteness of
2 the portions of the evidence that you are pointing at. Now, I -- there's
3 one issue, however, which appears here to be important, that is, that we
4 are quoting from a document which is not in evidence. So, therefore, if
5 there are any portions you want to point at, then perhaps we find a way
6 to get that into evidence so that we are not without the assistance of
7 the other portions of the statement.
8 Please proceed, Mr. Petrovic.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honours. I will
10 consult with my colleague and then maybe we will come up with a joint
11 proposal by the Defence teams as to how to treat this statement from 2004
12 by this witness.
13 Your Honours, I will need to ask your leave to do something, and
14 I would like to show you a document that we found overnight. I think
15 it's an important document, but unfortunately we don't have a
16 translation. And I would like to take advantage of this witness being
17 present. This is document 2D62, 65 ter, with your leave. Although there
18 is no translation, I would like to use this document. This is a document
19 from the collection that may be familiar to the Trial Chamber from some
20 other cases. The Republic of Croatia
21 according to what it says in this collection, this was a document found
22 in the office of the president of Croatia. And there is a number under
23 which it was registered. Unfortunately, there is no translation, but I
24 would like to show this document to the witness. And then once it has
25 been translated, we can tender the document or do as you order.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any reason to believe that the witness is
2 aware of this document. Because it may be a document, if relevant, which
3 could be bar tabled or -- because it seems to be an official document.
4 But if you first ask the witness whether he is aware of this document.
5 And then if you want to read a certain portion to him, please do so.
6 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Could the usher please assist us
7 and give the witness the document.
8 Q. This is a document drafted by the president for co-ordination of
9 the parties of Yugoslav orientation, Dr. Vida Matic [phoen]; the
10 president of the executive council of Slavonia and Western Srem
11 municipality of Beli Manastir, Borivoje Zivanovic [phoen]; and the
12 commander of the defence staff of Beli Manastir,
13 Major Borivoje Dobrokes. The document was drafted on the
14 11th of September, 1991, in other words, when the witness was there, and
15 it's entitled "Declaration of Capitulation of Croatia."
16 Witness, that is copy of this document, the transcript of this
17 document. This is not what it looked like in the original. My question
18 to you is: Are you aware that these three individuals issued this type
19 of declaration on the 11th of September, 1991?
20 A. I did not see this declaration when I was there. I'm not
21 familiar with it. But if you like, I can comment on it.
22 Q. Well, I will put a question to you about what is stated under
23 number 1. It says there, Baranja is free. The entire territory is under
24 the control of the TO Beli Manastir units and MUP forces, or rather, SUP
25 forces of the Beli Manastir municipality. In Baranja, the military rule
1 was in place for three days only, after which a new executive government
2 was elected in the autonomous region of Slavonia, Baranja, and Western
3 Srem, the Executive Council for Baranja.
4 Do you know whether what is stated here happened in Baranja
5 immediately before this date as noted here, the 11th of September, 1991
6 A. I don't.
7 Q. Would you please now take a look at paragraph 4. It says there:
8 To the citizens of Baranja, you are invited to return. We
9 guarantee freedom, law and order. Baranja is today under the control of
10 JNA units and units of the territorial Defence, and there are no
11 paramilitary units or organisations in our area.
12 Is this consistent with what you knew about the situation there
13 at the time when you were in Baranja?
14 A. No, it is not.
15 Q. Is it consistent with the statement that you gave in 2004 which
16 is identical to what is stated in paragraph 4 here as it relates to
17 military units in Baranja?
18 A. Are you referring to Beli Manastir only or -- well in Baranja
19 there were paramilitary units.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours --
21 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Petrovic, could you assist us in telling us
22 where we find a -- as you said, an identical statement?
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] You can find that -- well, the
24 65 ter number is 5305. Paragraph 76. Not to be shown to the public,
25 that's right.
1 JUDGE ORIE: I'll just read it into the record so that we know
2 what we are talking about. It's a short paragraph.
3 "I knew that the following paramilitaries were in the --"
4 [Trial Chamber and Registrar confer]
5 JUDGE ORIE: "I knew that the following paramilitaries were in
6 the region of Eastern Slavonia. Those of Zeljko Raznjatovic, also known
7 as Arkan, units commanded by Radovan Stojicic, also known as Badza," and
8 then I leave out a -- something between brackets, for obvious reasons,
9 "men of Vuk Draskovic and Vojislav Seselj. As far as I know, at the
10 time, those paramilitaries had not been operating in Baranja because the
11 area was under control of the JNA."
12 So there we have that now on the record.
13 Mr. Petrovic.
14 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
15 I would now like to ask that this document be marked for
16 identification, the one that I showed just now. And then we will deal
17 with it again when we have a translation that we can bring to the
18 attention of the Trial Chamber.
19 JUDGE ORIE: Then we'll proceed as you suggest. It is a document
20 under the number 152, dated the 11th of -- "Rujan" is what month again,
21 Mr. Petrovic?
22 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, "Rujan" is September,
23 I think.
24 JUDGE ORIE: Yes, 1991. And it is -- yes, I see it further down,
25 11/9/1991, and it is a declaration or a statement given by the persons
1 you mentioned.
2 Madam Registrar, the number would be ...
3 THE REGISTRAR: This would be Exhibit D58, marked for
4 identification, Your Honours.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you. And we wait for it to be uploaded and a
6 translation to be provided.
7 Mr. Petrovic.
8 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Thank you, Your Honour.
9 Q. Mr. Witness, in your earlier statement you said that the JNA had
10 had an important role in setting the borders of the SAO Krajina. Tell us
12 A. When there was a conflict between certain villages, the villagers
13 would place roadblocks in order to protect themselves. Then on the
14 following day we would go there to see the localities involved,
15 Vratisti [phoen], Vratiskovac [phoen], its characteristic.
16 Q. My question was one that required only a brief answer. I think
17 I'm getting to the very end. In this statement, 5305, 65 ter, in
18 paragraph 39, you said that the JNA was not involved in the separation of
19 forces, rather, they -- is that correct?
20 A. Yes.
21 THE INTERPRETER: Could counsel kindly repeat the last part of
22 his sentence, please, thank you.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation]
24 Q. Two questions now. Three, actually, if you allow me.
25 Mate Tenjic --
1 JUDGE ORIE: Limited time, Mr. Petrovic.
2 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, just three questions
3 and I'm done.
4 Q. So, Mate - I want to get the last name right - Mate Tenjajic, can
5 you tell us what his ethnicity was?
6 A. He was a Croat.
7 Q. Was anybody else present when you and Tenjajic talked, and is he
8 alive today, and where can we find him, if you know?
9 A. I don't know. I think Pero Lazukic was there too, and I heard
10 that Pero got killed. I know that his wife came to Belgrade, but I
11 really don't know about Mate Tenjajic.
12 Q. Last question: Did you write report during your stay in
13 Kninska Krajina and in Slavonia
14 A. In Kninska Krajina, yes; in Osijek
15 daily notes in my notebook. I wrote things in my notebook earlier on as
16 well and then based my notes on that.
17 Q. Did you ever convey the information that you received to anyone
18 while you were in Baranja?
19 A. Yes, to Petar Gracanin.
20 Q. Did you write that up when you came to Belgrade? Did you write
21 up a report?
22 A. I think so, yes.
23 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, on behalf of both
24 Defence teams, I would like to ask that the previous statements of this
25 witness that is marked as 5305 on the 65 ter list be admitted into
1 evidence because we put many questions on the basis of that statement,
2 and I believe that it can be of great assistance to the Trial Chamber
3 when assessing the evidence given by this witness. Of course, I'm
4 tendering it under seal.
5 I have no further questions for this witness.
6 JUDGE ORIE: It may create quite a bit of problems to deal with
7 it in this way because the only way of having it admitted would be under
8 Rule 92 ter. Now, there's as such no problem to that, but then we should
9 give the witness an opportunity to first read it all and then to make the
10 relevant attestations. And that's exactly the reason why I said that we
11 have to find a way of getting into evidence - and that's the reason why I
12 read even literally one paragraph - in order to have the relevant
14 We'll consider it. But even not knowing the response of the
15 Prosecution, the Chamber might be quite hesitant to follow this
16 alternative route without the witness having had an opportunity to review
17 his statement. And, nevertheless, he would have to give the
18 attestations. That's really problematic, Mr. Petrovic, from a procedural
19 point of view.
20 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] I fully understand that,
21 Your Honour. So although I haven't consulted my colleague from the
22 Stanisic Defence, I think that we could approach this in an alternative
23 fashion, namely, the parts of his statement that were read out before the
24 Honourable Trial Chamber and that the parties dealt with, could those
25 parts be admitted into evidence and the rest can be simply ignored.
1 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. Whether we can admitted it into evidence or
2 whether the parties could agree that that is what the witness stated at
3 the time and then select the paragraphs, then we have a -- at least a
5 Now, let's first see. Any need for re-examination, Mr. Hoffmann?
6 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, very briefly.
7 If I may just add one sentence to the issue of the tendering of
8 the statement.
9 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
10 MR. HOFFMANN: I think the relevant parts have been read into the
11 transcript when there was --
12 JUDGE ORIE: We can check that. And apparently what we want is
13 that if reference was made to the earlier statements when questions were
14 asked that in one way or another that it's put on the record what is in
15 that earlier statement relevant for the questions and for understanding
16 the answers.
17 Please proceed.
18 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honour.
19 Re-examination by Mr. Hoffmann:
20 Q. Mr. Witness, very briefly a number of questions. Today you were
21 asked in the context of the take-over of the federal MUP building, and
22 that is today at transcript page 17, there was a suggestion made to you
23 that documents were taken away by thieves and not just by colleagues or
24 other services. If you mentioned documents missing in the federal DB or
25 the federal MUP, did you have in mind general criminals coming into the
1 federal MUP and taking away documents?
2 MR. JORDASH: Sorry to leap up. I wasn't - just so that we are
3 clear so the issue can be expedited - I wasn't suggesting, if I can put
4 it this way, common criminals. I was suggesting employees taking
5 documents, thereby becoming thieves.
6 JUDGE ORIE: Yes. I remember -- I was about, when you put the
7 question the way in which you phrased it, to ask whether this was really
8 what you meant. Because theft being more, I think, more vulnerable for
9 thieves, I think you said, that, of course, was the suggestion.
10 But let's -- Mr. Hoffmann, I take it that we are not discussing
11 here whether ordinary thieves would, in order to get some paper, in order
12 to -- for whatever reason -- the matter seemed to be clear the suggestion
13 was not ordinary thieves. Apart from that, the witness did not respond
14 to that suggestion. He said papers disappeared. That's the evidence.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. HOFFMANN: I'm just looking at the record, Your Honours, and
17 I'm sorry to repeat, but at transcript 7 [sic] it says, you know:
18 "... the federal MUP ... became vulnerable to thieves and state
19 confidential material started to disappear, is that fair?"
20 And he said in the answer:
21 "It was to start earlier ..."
22 So at least if we now agree that it wasn't meant to be that
23 thieves would come and pick up documents, then I can leave it there. But
24 the record is pretty clear that --
25 JUDGE ORIE: Paper disappeared. And it is not suggested and
1 since we do not have evidence at this moment on who had stolen that, that
2 there's no reason to assume at this moment that these were ordinary
3 thieves coming from the street. Is that?
4 MR. JORDASH: That's correct. And the evidence was given --
5 JUDGE ORIE: Let's -- I consider that it really doesn't assist
6 the Chamber to explore in full depth this issue.
7 Please proceed.
8 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, I move on.
9 Q. Witness, during your testimony yesterday -- no, let me start this
10 way. Today you were asked a number of questions about the presence and
11 what you learned about Frenki's Men. Now, I just want to recall what you
12 stated yesterday on the record, and that is at transcript T4847. You
13 stated, and I quote:
14 "Since I was tasked by my superior as the leader of the group for
16 together ..." and I'll cut it short "... together we visited some of the
17 villages near Manastir and in the town itself."
18 And later on you said you talked to people in the villages, and I
19 quote then:
20 "They also talked about the presence of Chetniks, Chetnik
21 detachments, about Badza's Group or groups, also about the presence of
22 Frenki's Men, the Red Berets, Badza's Group ..." And so on.
23 Now, my question to you is: Apart from what you stated during
24 cross today that from a particular person in the barracks in
25 Beli Manastir, did you also learn from those villagers about the
1 Red Berets?
2 A. I cannot confirm that from the villagers because they were mostly
3 elderly people. They said Chetniks, paramilitaries, Arkan's Men,
4 White Eagles. I have no idea. I mean, please don't take my word for it
5 now for each and every one of them.
6 Q. Okay. I'll leave it at that. I want to bring up a just a video
7 still, and that is of the so-called Kula camp video. Exhibit P61. And
8 we are looking at minute 4, 43 seconds.
9 MR. JORDASH: Before the -- I beg your pardon. If my learned
10 friend is attempting to elicit new evidence concerning the identification
11 of one of the men mentioned during the witness's testimony present or
12 allegedly present at the Kula award ceremony, then we object. This
13 should have been dealt with in chief. It is opening a new line of
14 examination --
15 JUDGE ORIE: Mr. Hoffmann, where does it arise from the
16 cross-examination the question that you would like to put to the witness
17 at this moment?
18 MR. HOFFMANN: I'm having difficulties to directly respond
19 without, with my explanation, lead the witness of the possible
20 identification on those witnesses. But it is about a key person that
21 we've talked about yesterday and today that he has knowledge of. I'm not
22 going to ask anything else than to identify the person.
23 And I've tried to talk to both Defence teams even during the
24 break, whether we could just agree whether that particular person did
25 attend, yes or no. I understand that both weren't sure about it and
1 that's why they couldn't agree. So all I want to establish --
2 JUDGE ORIE: Is there any dispute as to the identity of that
3 person on this picture? I mean ...
4 MR. JORDASH: We don't know. We spoke to Mr. Hoffmann before the
5 break and we said we weren't in a position to confirm or deny and we
6 wanted time to consider it. And we thought that was the end of the
7 matter with this witness.
8 JUDGE ORIE: Yes.
9 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, as opposed to our
10 friend Mr. Jordash we lived there at the time and we can say what the
11 identity of that first person here is, that is to say, we can confirm
12 what he wanted to get from the witness. But what would that amount to?
13 Our testimony here?
14 JUDGE ORIE: No, a matter that you agree upon with the
15 Prosecution, that the person to the left on this is -- do you agree on
16 who it is? Who is it?
17 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honour, so if the question is
18 just, Who is this person in front of us, we can agree on that. However,
19 we cannot say where the picture was taken, how, et cetera.
20 JUDGE ORIE: Fine. Who is it as far as you are concerned?
21 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Petar Gracanin. The first man on
22 the left.
23 JUDGE ORIE: In agreement with the Prosecution?
24 MR. HOFFMANN: Yes, absolutely.
25 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. That's on the record.
1 Please proceed.
2 MR. HOFFMANN:
3 Q. Last question, witness --
4 MR. PETROVIC: [Interpretation] Your Honours, I do apologise. May
5 this part where it says where it is from, everything that is to be said
6 is who the person is. That can be put to the witness, nothing more than
8 JUDGE ORIE: But you agree.
9 Now, Mr. Jordash, are you going to challenge that, or would you
10 join in the agreement? Perhaps if you want to take instructions,
11 then ...
12 MR. JORDASH: We join in the agreement. Thank you.
13 JUDGE ORIE: Okay. All three parties agree that it's
14 Mr. Gracanin.
15 Please proceed.
16 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you, Your Honours.
17 Q. And very briefly, Witness, you were asked today whether you had
18 expected any assistance from the Tribunal when giving evidence and
19 obviously the suggestion to you was that you fabricated your evidence.
20 My question to you is: Did you ever invent any of your evidence before
21 this Tribunal?
22 A. I didn't invent anything. Perhaps it's only the passage of time
23 that affected my memory of persons, events, and situations. Otherwise I
24 stand by everything I had said.
25 Q. And my last question: Is it correct, Witness, that your request
1 for asylum in the country that you reside in has actually been denied a
2 number of years ago already?
3 A. Yes.
4 MR. HOFFMANN: Thank you. No further questions.
5 JUDGE ORIE: Has the re-examination triggered any need for
6 further questions?
7 Mr. Jordash.
5 [Private session]
11 Page 4980 redacted. Private session.
4 [Closed session]
11 Page 4982 redacted. Closed session.
20 [Open session]
21 THE REGISTRAR: We are in open session, Your Honours.
22 JUDGE ORIE: Thank you, Madam Registrar.
23 We'll adjourn, and we resume on Monday the 17th of May, quarter
24 past 2.00 in this same courtroom, and for the public already to know that
25 we'll move into closed session almost immediately after we have resumed.
1 We stand adjourned.
2 --- Whereupon the hearing adjourned at 7.03 p.m.
3 to be reconvened on Monday, the 17th day of
4 May, 2010, at 2.15 p.m.